Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Was "women & children first" not another way of saying "children first (because they are the future), and women with them, because they need to care for them" (something that men of the day wouldn't really have thought of as their role).


As an aside, "night to remember", when the bloke finds the lost little boy amidst all the chaos, and takes him, and holds him close as the ship sinks. Lump in throat moment.

The other issue is that not all the passengers could be saved so a choice had to be made. As pointed out above for all the reasons stated, it was seen as the right thing to be done at the time that women and children be saved first and men tough it out to the inevitable end. There is another aspect to this victorian view of chivalry. While it's correct to say that women and children were seen as weaker, women were also the child bearers. Their role in continuing and raising the human race was also given some value. This was still a time of high infant mortality (birth rates were accordingly high) and population was regularly culled by diseases we can treat easily today. Women regularly died during child birth too.


It was all just a reflection of the times. Thimgs are different today and have changed on the whole for the better. In the aftermath of Titanic many rules regarding Maritime Health and Safety were changed. Today there would be no need to declare women and children first as all ships contain enough lifeboats/rafts for every passenger. There are still issues in reacting to accidents at sea though, that cost lives, and issues regarding the design of some types of vessels that accelerate sinking when accidents happen. Ultimately though....human error is something that no amount of tinkering with laws can completely eradicate, along with human behaviour, in all it's forms and variety, in the face of danger.

Nope DJKQ. I'm with Woody on this.


It's not like the Somme or any WW1 remembrance enourmous, selfless sacrifice. Just a bunch of randoms on a big boat that hit an iceberg and didn't have enough lifebots - tragic for them and interesting on an 'intellectual' level. The mawkish Diana like sense of grief that some people (those tools on the boat that went to lay wreaths!) have for this when really, really, really there must be no-one in the world left who remembers anyone on it is a bit beyond me. The wall to wall coverage was ridiculous too.


Woodrot I salute your thread and others joined in a bit too.

Sorry Quids, but not sure I can agree with you on this. It was far from a rich list of dead. It was a combination of working class passengers and then an additional 500 or so staff from Southampton who made up the dead.


Southampton mourned this tragedy more than any other town. I was coincidentally in Southampton on the anniversary week and went to the exhibition and the local feeling is still strong amongst families there.


100 years is a major anniversary and that will be the end of it.


More stella?

Mick, where did I say they were all rich???? Just saying it's all a bit mawkish sentimentality as they've all been gone a long, long time. Are there really huge swathes of Southampton that it's still raw with? My grandad was in Silverrtown when a massive bomb hit a shelter in 1940, the 'official' figures were 600 mainly school kids and women, you don't meet hardly anyone who was effected by this nowadays. It's all a bit ancient history...unless we want to 'emote' about this stuff for ever. A minutes silence for the Titanic? Behave. Nearly twice as many, and mainly kids, went dowm with the Luithisaina 3 years later...don't hear much about that. Just a bit of fake sentimentality in my book. Understand the interest for various reasons but the sentimantality MEH

While I can agree with quids on the passage of time and unfounded sentimentality, most historians on the other hand would agree that the Titanic was symbolic of many things and marked a turning point in the aftermath of the tragedy at the time. That's what makes it an interesting episode in History. Yes people die all the time, often in tragic circumstances, but sometimes the world changes as a result of those deaths. The impact of the Titanic on society (not to mention maritime health and safety) was as big as anything that has the same impact today. Chapter Seven in Walter Lord's book eloquently communicates what Titanic stood for at the time and came to symbolise since. And it's not the only landmark in Maritime History either, to be fair.


Also just to follow on Mac's point. I can totally understand why Southampton would want to mark a 100th anniversary of a tragedy so attached to the city. Who are any of us to ridicule that?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...